The lefts movement towards removing deterrents to crime

[Ray From Cleveland]

I've been thinking about this for some time now. The left have called themselves progressives in the past, but now this is evident more than ever. They keep progressing towards removing deterrents to crime. Let's look at it:

*The left consistently tries to remove (or restrict) firearms in the hands of law abiding citizens.

*They have taken the stance that ICE should be dissolved.

*They have created sanctuary cities, and after Trump's election, sanctuary states.

*These riots could have been stopped, or even prevented by liberal Mayors asking the state for National Guard aid, but didn't. Nor did any of them accept the Presidents generous offer to help. Some of these disorders have been going on for months.

*They've long stood against the death penalty. They are fine with killing babies, but not killing murderers or mass murderers.

*They are now trying to defund, or even eliminate their police departments.

*They (Soros) have started organizations to provide bail to rioters who were arrested so they can get out to continue their crime spree.

*They shutdown the government for the longest time in history to prevent the President from building a wall.

So what do all these leftist policies have in common? They are all designed to weaken or remove deterrents to crime. While I understand the left is pretty much void of logic, the question is, what would weakening or removing these deterrents accomplish? The answer is, to promote more illegal activity.

Now that an election is coming up, do you vote for a candidate who's party is for getting rid of deterrents, or do you vote for a candidate that's for deterrents, and even stronger deterrents to help slow down or stop illegal activity?

I think you are underestimating the situation many of these city gvts are in and are overly optimistic of the power of the national guard....

These are cities coming out of lockdown with some as high as 40% of the citizens in inner city, laid off....unemployed, without jobs....with all the time in the world, on their side....

This isn't one of our typical situations with protests..... there is no short term solution, no twinkle the nose, all's good, bewitched solution....imo.

There is no reason for the protests or the riots. A police officer kneeled on some guy who died partly because of it. Mostly he was doped up on deadly narcotics. In any case, the officer was immediately arrested and charged, even before an investigation started yet alone completed.

So what more did they want? Nothing. Using that situation to act like uncivilized animals. Excuses are like assholes, everybody has one. However there are tens of millions out of work today, and they find better things to do with their time than cause problems.

I think it is a stretch to say the cop kneeling on the guy contributed to his death...especially after the autopsy. He had 2X the lethal dose of fentanyl in his system...he was already dead when the cops showed up.........kneeling on his neck had nothing to do with his death.

I was going by the original autopsy report. According to that, the kneeling was a contributing factor to his death, but of course the defense will fight that conclusion given his intoxication at the time.

I was a fan of the show COPS. I've seen police officers all over the country kneeling on the necks of out of control suspects like this guy. Nobody ever died from it.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I've been thinking about this for some time now. The left have called themselves progressives in the past, but now this is evident more than ever. They keep progressing towards removing deterrents to crime. Let's look at it:

*The left consistently tries to remove (or restrict) firearms in the hands of law abiding citizens.

*They have taken the stance that ICE should be dissolved.

*They have created sanctuary cities, and after Trump's election, sanctuary states.

*These riots could have been stopped, or even prevented by liberal Mayors asking the state for National Guard aid, but didn't. Nor did any of them accept the Presidents generous offer to help. Some of these disorders have been going on for months.

*They've long stood against the death penalty. They are fine with killing babies, but not killing murderers or mass murderers.

*They are now trying to defund, or even eliminate their police departments.

*They (Soros) have started organizations to provide bail to rioters who were arrested so they can get out to continue their crime spree.

*They shutdown the government for the longest time in history to prevent the President from building a wall.

So what do all these leftist policies have in common? They are all designed to weaken or remove deterrents to crime. While I understand the left is pretty much void of logic, the question is, what would weakening or removing these deterrents accomplish? The answer is, to promote more illegal activity.

Now that an election is coming up, do you vote for a candidate who's party is for getting rid of deterrents, or do you vote for a candidate that's for deterrents, and even stronger deterrents to help slow down or stop illegal activity?

You missed one...

The release violent, gun offenders over and over again and keep reducing the sentences and remove the laws that keep violent gun offenders in jail and prison...which is the direct cause of the gun violence levels in democrat party controlled cities.

Yes, there are more examples, but if I listed that one, the left would have come back with Trump doing the same thing. Mind you, I was against that too. Trump only did it to try and garner more black votes.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I've been thinking about this for some time now. The left have called themselves progressives in the past, but now this is evident more than ever. They keep progressing towards removing deterrents to crime. Let's look at it:

*The left consistently tries to remove (or restrict) firearms in the hands of law abiding citizens.

*They have taken the stance that ICE should be dissolved.

*They have created sanctuary cities, and after Trump's election, sanctuary states.

*These riots could have been stopped, or even prevented by liberal Mayors asking the state for National Guard aid, but didn't. Nor did any of them accept the Presidents generous offer to help. Some of these disorders have been going on for months.

*They've long stood against the death penalty. They are fine with killing babies, but not killing murderers or mass murderers.

*They are now trying to defund, or even eliminate their police departments.

*They (Soros) have started organizations to provide bail to rioters who were arrested so they can get out to continue their crime spree.

*They shutdown the government for the longest time in history to prevent the President from building a wall.

So what do all these leftist policies have in common? They are all designed to weaken or remove deterrents to crime. While I understand the left is pretty much void of logic, the question is, what would weakening or removing these deterrents accomplish? The answer is, to promote more illegal activity.

Now that an election is coming up, do you vote for a candidate who's party is for getting rid of deterrents, or do you vote for a candidate that's for deterrents, and even stronger deterrents to help slow down or stop illegal activity?

I'll vote for the candidate (Biden) that didn't have convicted criminals all around him every step of the way. Thanks.

And thank you for chiming in with deflection. Try sticking to the topic please.

The topic is crime. Its in the title of your thread doofus.
Your blob surrounded himself with convicted criminals.
No thank you.

Obama/Biden weaponized the CIA, FBI and IRS. That is the ultimate corruption and the quickest way to destroy a country from within.

Yet your blob is the one who surrounded himself with convicted felons.

The leftist always throw a hissy fit and prosecute anyone on the winning side when they lose.

Your blob surrounded himself with felons. Quite true.

Which one was a convicted felon before Trump hired them?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I've been thinking about this for some time now. The left have called themselves progressives in the past, but now this is evident more than ever. They keep progressing towards removing deterrents to crime. Let's look at it:

*The left consistently tries to remove (or restrict) firearms in the hands of law abiding citizens.

*They have taken the stance that ICE should be dissolved.

*They have created sanctuary cities, and after Trump's election, sanctuary states.

*These riots could have been stopped, or even prevented by liberal Mayors asking the state for National Guard aid, but didn't. Nor did any of them accept the Presidents generous offer to help. Some of these disorders have been going on for months.

*They've long stood against the death penalty. They are fine with killing babies, but not killing murderers or mass murderers.

*They are now trying to defund, or even eliminate their police departments.

*They (Soros) have started organizations to provide bail to rioters who were arrested so they can get out to continue their crime spree.

*They shutdown the government for the longest time in history to prevent the President from building a wall.

So what do all these leftist policies have in common? They are all designed to weaken or remove deterrents to crime. While I understand the left is pretty much void of logic, the question is, what would weakening or removing these deterrents accomplish? The answer is, to promote more illegal activity.

Now that an election is coming up, do you vote for a candidate who's party is for getting rid of deterrents, or do you vote for a candidate that's for deterrents, and even stronger deterrents to help slow down or stop illegal activity?

Trump has made it quite fashionable for conservatives to openly support state control over people

View attachment 385376
Your party.

View attachment 385398

I think if your experience for the job, is better than the other person. Than that person should get the job, no matter what color they are. It seems that liberals think that color should get you the job. No matter the experience of the person. That's the problem, see which party is the problem?

Their excuse for supporting things like Affirmative Action is that blacks have been held back so long allowing the white race to get so much further ahead. I don't believe that for a second. Every white friend of mine is no different than myself. Our parents were never wealthy, and only did manual labor which gave them the ability to make a reasonable living. If they inherited something from their parents, it wasn't very much.

Our generation may be different. Again, we probably won't get a lot, but the most in our family history I'm sure.

Blacks are getting jobs over whites. I'm retired now, but several of my former customers switched from a predominantly white crew to predominantly black. It had nothing to do with law or guilt, it's just that blacks are willing to work for less money than whites. In their neighborhoods, the cost of living is lower and they can get by.

 

[candycorn]

I've been thinking about this for some time now. The left have called themselves progressives in the past, but now this is evident more than ever. They keep progressing towards removing deterrents to crime. Let's look at it:

*The left consistently tries to remove (or restrict) firearms in the hands of law abiding citizens.

*They have taken the stance that ICE should be dissolved.

*They have created sanctuary cities, and after Trump's election, sanctuary states.

*These riots could have been stopped, or even prevented by liberal Mayors asking the state for National Guard aid, but didn't. Nor did any of them accept the Presidents generous offer to help. Some of these disorders have been going on for months.

*They've long stood against the death penalty. They are fine with killing babies, but not killing murderers or mass murderers.

*They are now trying to defund, or even eliminate their police departments.

*They (Soros) have started organizations to provide bail to rioters who were arrested so they can get out to continue their crime spree.

*They shutdown the government for the longest time in history to prevent the President from building a wall.

So what do all these leftist policies have in common? They are all designed to weaken or remove deterrents to crime. While I understand the left is pretty much void of logic, the question is, what would weakening or removing these deterrents accomplish? The answer is, to promote more illegal activity.

Now that an election is coming up, do you vote for a candidate who's party is for getting rid of deterrents, or do you vote for a candidate that's for deterrents, and even stronger deterrents to help slow down or stop illegal activity?

I'll vote for the candidate (Biden) that didn't have convicted criminals all around him every step of the way. Thanks.

And thank you for chiming in with deflection. Try sticking to the topic please.

The topic is crime. Its in the title of your thread doofus.
Your blob surrounded himself with convicted criminals.
No thank you.

Obama/Biden weaponized the CIA, FBI and IRS. That is the ultimate corruption and the quickest way to destroy a country from within.

Yet your blob is the one who surrounded himself with convicted felons.

The leftist always throw a hissy fit and prosecute anyone on the winning side when they lose.

Your blob surrounded himself with felons. Quite true.

Which one was a convicted felon before Trump hired them?

Great distinction there...

So far Biden has hired 0.00 felons in 40+ years of public service. In less than 4 your blob has hired almost a dozen.

Care to keep playing like the blob is "tough on crime"?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I've been thinking about this for some time now. The left have called themselves progressives in the past, but now this is evident more than ever. They keep progressing towards removing deterrents to crime. Let's look at it:

*The left consistently tries to remove (or restrict) firearms in the hands of law abiding citizens.

*They have taken the stance that ICE should be dissolved.

*They have created sanctuary cities, and after Trump's election, sanctuary states.

*These riots could have been stopped, or even prevented by liberal Mayors asking the state for National Guard aid, but didn't. Nor did any of them accept the Presidents generous offer to help. Some of these disorders have been going on for months.

*They've long stood against the death penalty. They are fine with killing babies, but not killing murderers or mass murderers.

*They are now trying to defund, or even eliminate their police departments.

*They (Soros) have started organizations to provide bail to rioters who were arrested so they can get out to continue their crime spree.

*They shutdown the government for the longest time in history to prevent the President from building a wall.

So what do all these leftist policies have in common? They are all designed to weaken or remove deterrents to crime. While I understand the left is pretty much void of logic, the question is, what would weakening or removing these deterrents accomplish? The answer is, to promote more illegal activity.

Now that an election is coming up, do you vote for a candidate who's party is for getting rid of deterrents, or do you vote for a candidate that's for deterrents, and even stronger deterrents to help slow down or stop illegal activity?

I'll vote for the candidate (Biden) that didn't have convicted criminals all around him every step of the way. Thanks.

And thank you for chiming in with deflection. Try sticking to the topic please.

The topic is crime. Its in the title of your thread doofus.
Your blob surrounded himself with convicted criminals.
No thank you.

Obama/Biden weaponized the CIA, FBI and IRS. That is the ultimate corruption and the quickest way to destroy a country from within.

Yet your blob is the one who surrounded himself with convicted felons.

The leftist always throw a hissy fit and prosecute anyone on the winning side when they lose.

Your blob surrounded himself with felons. Quite true.

Which one was a convicted felon before Trump hired them?

Great distinction there...

So far Biden has hired 0.00 felons in 40+ years of public service. In less than 4 your blob has hired almost a dozen.

Care to keep playing like the blob is "tough on crime"?

Deflection noted, but I understand how you don't want to admit to lying in the public forum.

Trump never hired felons. Nobody was a convicted felon before being hired by Trump. The deep state went after them after they accepted a job with the administration. It's what Nazi's do.

 

[candycorn]

I've been thinking about this for some time now. The left have called themselves progressives in the past, but now this is evident more than ever. They keep progressing towards removing deterrents to crime. Let's look at it:

*The left consistently tries to remove (or restrict) firearms in the hands of law abiding citizens.

*They have taken the stance that ICE should be dissolved.

*They have created sanctuary cities, and after Trump's election, sanctuary states.

*These riots could have been stopped, or even prevented by liberal Mayors asking the state for National Guard aid, but didn't. Nor did any of them accept the Presidents generous offer to help. Some of these disorders have been going on for months.

*They've long stood against the death penalty. They are fine with killing babies, but not killing murderers or mass murderers.

*They are now trying to defund, or even eliminate their police departments.

*They (Soros) have started organizations to provide bail to rioters who were arrested so they can get out to continue their crime spree.

*They shutdown the government for the longest time in history to prevent the President from building a wall.

So what do all these leftist policies have in common? They are all designed to weaken or remove deterrents to crime. While I understand the left is pretty much void of logic, the question is, what would weakening or removing these deterrents accomplish? The answer is, to promote more illegal activity.

Now that an election is coming up, do you vote for a candidate who's party is for getting rid of deterrents, or do you vote for a candidate that's for deterrents, and even stronger deterrents to help slow down or stop illegal activity?

I'll vote for the candidate (Biden) that didn't have convicted criminals all around him every step of the way. Thanks.

And thank you for chiming in with deflection. Try sticking to the topic please.

The topic is crime. Its in the title of your thread doofus.
Your blob surrounded himself with convicted criminals.
No thank you.

Obama/Biden weaponized the CIA, FBI and IRS. That is the ultimate corruption and the quickest way to destroy a country from within.

Yet your blob is the one who surrounded himself with convicted felons.

The leftist always throw a hissy fit and prosecute anyone on the winning side when they lose.

Your blob surrounded himself with felons. Quite true.

Which one was a convicted felon before Trump hired them?

Great distinction there...

So far Biden has hired 0.00 felons in 40+ years of public service. In less than 4 your blob has hired almost a dozen.

Care to keep playing like the blob is "tough on crime"?

Deflection noted, but I understand how you don't want to admit to lying in the public forum.

Trump never hired felons. Nobody was a convicted felon before being hired by Trump. The deep state went after them after they accepted a job with the administration. It's what Nazi's do.

Distinction without a difference noted. I do understand how you can't seriously think the blob has been hard on crime when he surrounded himself with criminals. This, after stating, "I hire the best people." Your blob is a joke and so are you.

And of course....now you go to the conspiracy theory card and envoke the "deep state". The criminals that the blob hired were prosecuted by the blob's DOJ. So that means he's part of the Deep State too.

Again...
Your thread is a joke and so are you.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I've been thinking about this for some time now. The left have called themselves progressives in the past, but now this is evident more than ever. They keep progressing towards removing deterrents to crime. Let's look at it:

*The left consistently tries to remove (or restrict) firearms in the hands of law abiding citizens.

*They have taken the stance that ICE should be dissolved.

*They have created sanctuary cities, and after Trump's election, sanctuary states.

*These riots could have been stopped, or even prevented by liberal Mayors asking the state for National Guard aid, but didn't. Nor did any of them accept the Presidents generous offer to help. Some of these disorders have been going on for months.

*They've long stood against the death penalty. They are fine with killing babies, but not killing murderers or mass murderers.

*They are now trying to defund, or even eliminate their police departments.

*They (Soros) have started organizations to provide bail to rioters who were arrested so they can get out to continue their crime spree.

*They shutdown the government for the longest time in history to prevent the President from building a wall.

So what do all these leftist policies have in common? They are all designed to weaken or remove deterrents to crime. While I understand the left is pretty much void of logic, the question is, what would weakening or removing these deterrents accomplish? The answer is, to promote more illegal activity.

Now that an election is coming up, do you vote for a candidate who's party is for getting rid of deterrents, or do you vote for a candidate that's for deterrents, and even stronger deterrents to help slow down or stop illegal activity?

I'll vote for the candidate (Biden) that didn't have convicted criminals all around him every step of the way. Thanks.

And thank you for chiming in with deflection. Try sticking to the topic please.

The topic is crime. Its in the title of your thread doofus.
Your blob surrounded himself with convicted criminals.
No thank you.

Obama/Biden weaponized the CIA, FBI and IRS. That is the ultimate corruption and the quickest way to destroy a country from within.

Yet your blob is the one who surrounded himself with convicted felons.

The leftist always throw a hissy fit and prosecute anyone on the winning side when they lose.

Your blob surrounded himself with felons. Quite true.

Which one was a convicted felon before Trump hired them?

Great distinction there...

So far Biden has hired 0.00 felons in 40+ years of public service. In less than 4 your blob has hired almost a dozen.

Care to keep playing like the blob is "tough on crime"?

Deflection noted, but I understand how you don't want to admit to lying in the public forum.

Trump never hired felons. Nobody was a convicted felon before being hired by Trump. The deep state went after them after they accepted a job with the administration. It's what Nazi's do.

Distinction without a difference noted. I do understand how you can't seriously think the blob has been hard on crime when he surrounded himself with criminals. This, after stating, "I hire the best people." Your blob is a joke and so are you.

And of course....now you go to the conspiracy theory card and envoke the "deep state". The criminals that the blob hired were prosecuted by the blob's DOJ. So that means he's part of the Deep State too.

Again...
Your thread is a joke and so are you.

And yet, you are participating in it.

You shouldn't make references to terms you don't know the definition of. The deep state is a shadow government, often to undermine the legitimate government. That's what we have and still have during the Trump administration. We have people still working for the Democrat party to destroy Trump in the various bureaucracies and agencies of the federal government, and yes, that includes the DOJ.

 

[candycorn]

I've been thinking about this for some time now. The left have called themselves progressives in the past, but now this is evident more than ever. They keep progressing towards removing deterrents to crime. Let's look at it:

*The left consistently tries to remove (or restrict) firearms in the hands of law abiding citizens.

*They have taken the stance that ICE should be dissolved.

*They have created sanctuary cities, and after Trump's election, sanctuary states.

*These riots could have been stopped, or even prevented by liberal Mayors asking the state for National Guard aid, but didn't. Nor did any of them accept the Presidents generous offer to help. Some of these disorders have been going on for months.

*They've long stood against the death penalty. They are fine with killing babies, but not killing murderers or mass murderers.

*They are now trying to defund, or even eliminate their police departments.

*They (Soros) have started organizations to provide bail to rioters who were arrested so they can get out to continue their crime spree.

*They shutdown the government for the longest time in history to prevent the President from building a wall.

So what do all these leftist policies have in common? They are all designed to weaken or remove deterrents to crime. While I understand the left is pretty much void of logic, the question is, what would weakening or removing these deterrents accomplish? The answer is, to promote more illegal activity.

Now that an election is coming up, do you vote for a candidate who's party is for getting rid of deterrents, or do you vote for a candidate that's for deterrents, and even stronger deterrents to help slow down or stop illegal activity?

I'll vote for the candidate (Biden) that didn't have convicted criminals all around him every step of the way. Thanks.

And thank you for chiming in with deflection. Try sticking to the topic please.

The topic is crime. Its in the title of your thread doofus.
Your blob surrounded himself with convicted criminals.
No thank you.

Obama/Biden weaponized the CIA, FBI and IRS. That is the ultimate corruption and the quickest way to destroy a country from within.

Yet your blob is the one who surrounded himself with convicted felons.

The leftist always throw a hissy fit and prosecute anyone on the winning side when they lose.

Your blob surrounded himself with felons. Quite true.

Which one was a convicted felon before Trump hired them?

Great distinction there...

So far Biden has hired 0.00 felons in 40+ years of public service. In less than 4 your blob has hired almost a dozen.

Care to keep playing like the blob is "tough on crime"?

Deflection noted, but I understand how you don't want to admit to lying in the public forum.

Trump never hired felons. Nobody was a convicted felon before being hired by Trump. The deep state went after them after they accepted a job with the administration. It's what Nazi's do.

Distinction without a difference noted. I do understand how you can't seriously think the blob has been hard on crime when he surrounded himself with criminals. This, after stating, "I hire the best people." Your blob is a joke and so are you.

And of course....now you go to the conspiracy theory card and envoke the "deep state". The criminals that the blob hired were prosecuted by the blob's DOJ. So that means he's part of the Deep State too.

Again...
Your thread is a joke and so are you.

And yet, you are participating in it.

You shouldn't make references to terms you don't know the definition of. The deep state is a shadow government, often to undermine the legitimate government. That's what we have and still have during the Trump administration. We have people still working for the Democrat party to destroy Trump in the various bureaucracies and agencies of the federal government, and yes, that includes the DOJ.

LOL...

If the conviction, after conviction, after conviction, after conviction, after conviction, after conviction, after conviction, after conviction, after conviction, after conviction, after conviction, of the blob's personal hires during the blob's administration is the work of the "deep state", that means the blob is part of the deep state. And the blob casts a very big round shadow since he is morbidly obese.

You can't be tough on crime after you've surrounded yourself with criminals...as your blob has done.

 

[WEATHER53]

The ni$ger cowardly sneaking up behind the guy walking down the sidewalk in Baltimore and hitting him over the head and the guy dropping to the pavement like a bag of rocks is reprehensible
Wish I had been there as I would have shot him

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I've been thinking about this for some time now. The left have called themselves progressives in the past, but now this is evident more than ever. They keep progressing towards removing deterrents to crime. Let's look at it:

*The left consistently tries to remove (or restrict) firearms in the hands of law abiding citizens.

*They have taken the stance that ICE should be dissolved.

*They have created sanctuary cities, and after Trump's election, sanctuary states.

*These riots could have been stopped, or even prevented by liberal Mayors asking the state for National Guard aid, but didn't. Nor did any of them accept the Presidents generous offer to help. Some of these disorders have been going on for months.

*They've long stood against the death penalty. They are fine with killing babies, but not killing murderers or mass murderers.

*They are now trying to defund, or even eliminate their police departments.

*They (Soros) have started organizations to provide bail to rioters who were arrested so they can get out to continue their crime spree.

*They shutdown the government for the longest time in history to prevent the President from building a wall.

So what do all these leftist policies have in common? They are all designed to weaken or remove deterrents to crime. While I understand the left is pretty much void of logic, the question is, what would weakening or removing these deterrents accomplish? The answer is, to promote more illegal activity.

Now that an election is coming up, do you vote for a candidate who's party is for getting rid of deterrents, or do you vote for a candidate that's for deterrents, and even stronger deterrents to help slow down or stop illegal activity?

I'll vote for the candidate (Biden) that didn't have convicted criminals all around him every step of the way. Thanks.

And thank you for chiming in with deflection. Try sticking to the topic please.

The topic is crime. Its in the title of your thread doofus.
Your blob surrounded himself with convicted criminals.
No thank you.

Obama/Biden weaponized the CIA, FBI and IRS. That is the ultimate corruption and the quickest way to destroy a country from within.

Yet your blob is the one who surrounded himself with convicted felons.

The leftist always throw a hissy fit and prosecute anyone on the winning side when they lose.

Your blob surrounded himself with felons. Quite true.

Which one was a convicted felon before Trump hired them?

Great distinction there...

So far Biden has hired 0.00 felons in 40+ years of public service. In less than 4 your blob has hired almost a dozen.

Care to keep playing like the blob is "tough on crime"?

Deflection noted, but I understand how you don't want to admit to lying in the public forum.

Trump never hired felons. Nobody was a convicted felon before being hired by Trump. The deep state went after them after they accepted a job with the administration. It's what Nazi's do.

Distinction without a difference noted. I do understand how you can't seriously think the blob has been hard on crime when he surrounded himself with criminals. This, after stating, "I hire the best people." Your blob is a joke and so are you.

And of course....now you go to the conspiracy theory card and envoke the "deep state". The criminals that the blob hired were prosecuted by the blob's DOJ. So that means he's part of the Deep State too.

Again...
Your thread is a joke and so are you.

And yet, you are participating in it.

You shouldn't make references to terms you don't know the definition of. The deep state is a shadow government, often to undermine the legitimate government. That's what we have and still have during the Trump administration. We have people still working for the Democrat party to destroy Trump in the various bureaucracies and agencies of the federal government, and yes, that includes the DOJ.

LOL...

If the conviction, after conviction, after conviction, after conviction, after conviction, after conviction, after conviction, after conviction, after conviction, after conviction, after conviction, of the blob's personal hires during the blob's administration is the work of the "deep state", that means the blob is part of the deep state. And the blob casts a very big round shadow since he is morbidly obese.

You can't be tough on crime after you've surrounded yourself with criminals...as your blob has done.

I don't consider people convicted of process crimes as real criminals. Those are setup crimes procured by the deep state, and yes, there is a deep state which of course, Trump can't be part of since he's in the legitimate government.

Now if there is no deep state, can you explain how CNN was setup at Roger Stones home when the overnight arrest took place? Were they just in the neighborhood and got lucky? Was the camera person on his way home from church and happen to drive by? Why did they need so many agents to arrest a harmless little old guy?

Of course it was a setup by the deep state. They sent enough agents there to create the scene. They informed CNN to be there to record it all to make Trump look bad. So don't tell me there is no deep state.